Talking with darw_n makes my brain hurt a wee bit, but here goes... > See, I just can't let something be like that, I want, no need, to know what > that "is" is...
I reckon your wrong, too. And the above, I think, is the problem. The "is" is just what you get given to you, e.g. Beethoven's 9th is, even in essence, Beethoven's entire 9th. What you try and do is distill it into something "purer" and more "minimal". The terminology is misleading you here, though. You are just doing something different. No more and no less. That needn't invalidate anything like the politics or philosophy surrounding the work in question, though. So you're tone shifting isn't wrong, but it certainly isn't the essence either. It's just an approach. It's like someone doing an analysis of Hamlet, say. If the essence of Hamlet were, for example, the philosophy of self it represents to some, then it would be better expressed as an essay on the philosophy of self. Obviously, it wouldn't really, though: the essence of Hamlet is Hamlet. It is what it is. I humbly await your mind numbing rays of wisdom ;) Jonny
